I always have fun when I come around to play Tod, but I had a LOT of fun with this one. Any special requests for things people would like me to explore with this weapon, please comment below.
I don't really think I NEED to ask this, but I'm not the expert. How's it handle compared to a longsword? I mean, I'm guessing the handling is really different, but you were both making comments about the point of balance, so I'm just curious.
This was a fun one, Matt! I'd love to see some exploration of the use of the other end of this weapon. You talked about it early in the video about how you thought both ends were like used in combat. I'm also very intrigued by that prong on the shaft (was it meant to catch swords?); I'd love to see some exploration of that too. Great stuff!
What an odd and fascinating weapon. Almost certainly a judicial combat weapon, a show piece, or maybe an experimental gadget for a rich patron, as shown by the bend in the shaft after real use.
Would this be a proof of concept for a knight or Lord? No even an "alpha" build just something to show what can be done to armor? Or would this be too expensive for a proof of concept?
As a paramedic I find the sustained injuries truly awful. Clearly immediately debilitating, there are however further likely consequences of such injuries. Obviously infection is a concern, but localised muscle death anddestruction of blood and lymphatic vessels are likely, as is necrosis of the skin. Compartment Syndrome might necessitate amputation of the affected limb, and rhabdomyolysis, the breakdown of damaged muscle could lead to kidney failure and death within a few days of sustaining such an injury. Grim.
And here we all think it's barbaric when the movie characters are walking the field after the battle stabbing the survivors to death. Turns out they're just being merciful.
@@mikefule330 Just looking at the foam, and the inside of that armor, I'm guessing some broken ribs. Even if it's not instantly incapacitating, he's going to be spending the rest of the fight with some broken ribs. Wounding counts too. Especially in a war of Attrition, the wounded can take 3 guys off the battlefield: The guy you just wounded, and the 2 guys to drag him to safety. Of course it's designed to kill, or instantly incapacitate, but it isn't going to do that with every hit. Realistically, the enemy fights less effectively when they're wounded. Any wound counts, even if they're not struck down as if smitten by the hand of God. Even mortal wounds aren't instantly fatal. (There are very few exceptions on the medieval battlefield) It can take a few seconds to bleed out from an arrow through the heart. That doesn't mean he's still fighting, effectively, with an arrow through his heart.
That weapon kinda makes me think of an " apprentice piece " or a practice piece designed to show many aspects of weapons craftsman ship to their master.
That's exactly What I was thinking during the whole video, they have a great pace when they talk. Sometimes on YT when a youtuber has a guest or sometimes even on channels that have a double presenter set up, One overwhelms the other, making It a pain to Watch. They worked in perfect balance throught the whole video, which Is a skill on its own.
@@metatronyt I think Skall is pretty good at that too, in his hangouts and other dialogue videos. I think it's also like in online meetings, in that it gets worse if the meeting is online than in person, so Matt and Tod has a bit of an advantage over digital discussions there.
@@nevisysbryd7450 Just because someone else has tenderised your meat before you is no reason to turn up your nose. Besides, good luck finding some that isn't pre-penetrated these days. Wait, what are we talking about again?
One of my neighbours owns something very similar to this, apparently passed down through the family from the English Civil Wars. I will ask him tomorrow if I could take some photos for comparison.
I just want to leave this thought that applies to all weapons with these kind of hammer heads: I think we're a bit confused by the spike. I think we see it alongside the hammer, and assume it's for *penetrating through* lighter armour. I don't think this is exactly right. I think both the spike and hammer are for transferring blunt force, just in different ways for different targets. The "spread out" head of the hammer is to allow the force to be conveyed to very hard, rigid targets (plate) without it just skidding off. Malleable armours like mail and textile armours aren't going to redirect force like plate, so you don't need to spread the force out, so that's why you have the spike. It allows all of that blunt force to be applied to a tiny area, which is going to do more damage through the armour (not necessarily through penetrating) Though I should say that I'm not referring to the very long, slender, "pick" like spikes that you see. Those definitely look like they're intended to penetrate softer targets. I'm referring to the "stubbier" kind of spikes lol
A war hammers back spike was used to punch holes right through plate armor. All hammers were just brutal weapons. Great hammers heavy mauls etc were often used to cave in the chest plate on plate armor to compress the chest resulting in suffocation. Hammer with long spikes had their spiked used to punch through plate specifically the chest to pernitrate the chest cavity or a helm. Short blunt spiked would be used to cave in a helmet by focusing the force on a small area. This is why you often see hammers with this head design the small spikes on the striking face would dent the armor or Pearce it and the flat of the hammer would continue to crush the damaged helm. With one solid hit those spikes could then enter the skull
@@nanaki-seto What are you basing this on? From what I've seen, the likelihood of a even a spike on a polearm penetrating plate is extremely low. Even given a perfect hit (which is not likely due to it hitting a likely angled, very "slippery" surface), I would not put money on it penetrating. I think it's one of those commonly repeated misconceptions that it can/was intended to do so. We know these weapons "worked" or they wouldn't have been used for so long and so frequently, but we might be making flawed assumptions in how exactly how they worked. Bit of a tangent, but I think there are many things like this actually. Like with bows: it seems pretty clear that even a powerful bow isn't going to penetrate competently made plate; but we know that bows worked, even against well armoured knights and men-at-arms. So how did they work? We don't really know, but it's probably more complicated, nuanced, and frankly, less meme-worthy than "arrow penetrate breastplate".
I think the hammers were used to: 1. Transfer force through the armor and cause injuries like broken bones and if striking the helm, concussion and/or unconsciousness. 2. Compromise the articulation points to restrict movement and make the individual less combat effective.
@@tasatort9778 My main point about the hammerhead is that it's primary job is just getting purchase on the "slippery" plate target, so it can efficiently transfer the force. That's why most hammerheads on weapons have a kind of "splayed out" head. If a spike was able to get the same kind of purchase on plate, there'd be no reason to have the hammerhead
@@tommeakin1732 That's my guess as well and remember, you don't have to kill or seriously injur someone to get them out of the fight. If you simply daze them a bit, or take away their ability to defend themselves effectively they'll most likely back off to preserve their lives. Once you do this to enough enemy soldiers their line starts to break and victory often happens soon after. A breast plate is a pretty solid defense against almost everything, until you focus on the edges of it. Nobody ever does these armour tests properly. The same weak spots you would look to penetrate while half swording, can in many cases also be "crushed" quite easily because the armour is weaker and less substantial in those areas. You don't hammer the enemies chest. You hammer his neck and joints. Even if you don't break bones or cause enough physical trauma, his armour is going to bend and immobilize him. Then he becomes afraid and backs out of the fight. Fear of death on the battle field is just as important as actually killing someone.
I love these epispdes so much. These are the kind of collaborations that I adore. The combination of designing and forging a weapon, historical context, actually testing it, and discussing doctrine. This is the sort of thing that sets my imagination ablaze.
With the shaft bending at every strike it's probably safe to say that this weapon is unable to transfer as much energy as a traditional polearm in a strong swing. Which is also a factor of why the stab was apparently more effective than the swing.
I am wondering if this was indeed a secondary weapon, smash the shield arm with blunt force trauma to drop the guard and then use dagger and/or sword to finish off.
@@Buzzcook The hickory staves I've trained & messed around with are remarkably rigid. I'm sure they flex some on powerful strikes, but I don't recall noticing it. I can't bend the 4.5ft one I have at hand at all by bracing with my knee or against the ground. Now, I'm not a large or muscular person & hickory is stronger than ash or oak, but I suspect the thicker pollaxe shafts stood up well to heavy blows. I once bent an Arms & Armor English bill by accidentally striking a pumpkin with the flat of the top spike. I don't recall the ash shaft flexing enough to notice when hitting pumpkins. With hickory staves, I struck pumpkins as hard as with the bill & don't remember any flex.
@thekaxmax Nah this thing is no sword, is a hammer with a guard. And in my opinion bladeless swords, like some polish thrusting swords that were triangular or hexagonal pieces of metal with a point, aren't really swords, as much as people call them it. Names work like that. What's the difference between a short sword and a long knife? It can be no other but the names. It's how it is. Now I agree with you that a sword needs no edge to be a sword, but it needs at least a blade. And yeah, the thing in this video is no sword.
@@thekaxmax Nah this thing is no sword, is a hammer with a guard. And in my opinion bladeless swords, like some polish thrusting swords that were triangular or hexagonal pieces of metal with a point, aren't really swords, as much as people call them it. Names work like that. What's the difference between a short sword and a long knife? It can be no other but the names. It's how it is. Now I agree with you that a sword needs no edge to be a sword, but it needs at least a blade. And yeah, the thing in this video is no sword.
i agree that this weapon is mainly an hammer, but it isn't just a war hammer with a guard: it also has a very low point of balance, just like a sword. In my opinion 'sword-hammer' or 'sword-pollaxe' are suitable name
15:15 I actually think that the reason for the deeper penetration with the top-spike is simply that it is much narrower than the big, beefy and thick hammer-spike. In return it delivers a hell lot more of pure concussive force. A swing will always be more powerful than a thrust...at least that's what I have experienced.
@@tods_workshop Yeah, that's very much understandable. In the situation one often overlooks aspects which seem very obvious when looking at it later. Keep up the good content, Tod!
Saw Tod as the expert on a scrapheap challenge episode yesterday. Recognised him immediately. He made a golf ball machine gun. I know him from RUclips making and exploring old weapons similar to this. But seems like he is a man of many talents and won his team the competition on scrapheap. Love the content Tod new and old! Some real high class stuff!
Blimey that must have been 20 years ago with a much younger me. That was a fun one and in fact I ended up being a staff engineer on the show for two series. Great fun and an amazing experience.
I couldn't find the golf ball machine gun episode on RUclips but did find the ballista episode where Tod and teammates built a bizarre hydraulic ballista ruclips.net/video/o54pVz7TjtI/видео.html also there is Tod's "could have been" reminesce about the episode ruclips.net/video/QkVslMWwx8ch/видео.htmlttps://ruclips.net/video/o54pVz7TjtI/видео.html
Wow I love these collaboration videos. You both did a great Job. I was also very surpriced with the shaft bending After the impact. I think that gives us a Hint. If It Bends on a duel it's no big deal, but if It Bends on a Battlefield It would be. Matt mentioned the Weapon Is shown in manuscripts, I wonder if it's ever shown used in battle. If It isn't, then perhaps it's Just a "use and ditch" Weapon for duels. A bit like the Shields that would get destroyed. On a Battlefield a poleaxe would definitely outperform this, also because of the range advantage. Sure, the sword hilt gives Better defence but then again, range Is a form of defence in of itself. Could It Just be a curiosity implement like the lantern shield?
HI Meta, Thanks for popping by and the compliments. You make some good points and to be honest I suspect that Matts thoughts that it is a judicial duel weapon, could be right.
The multiweapon fancy lantern shield found in museums, presumably? Judging from Sir Kenelm Digby's description of encountering them in a streetfight in Madrid in 1623, bucklers specially constructed for night fighting to hold lanterns and reflect their light forwards were seemingly in real use, and not curiosities. "his enemies having at the top of their bucklers artificial lanterns whose light was cast only forwards by their being made with an iron plate on that side towards the holders, so that their bodies remained in darkness"
really nice collaboration, as usual. But for me it's impossible that the shaft is only mild steel. If I was a knight that have ordered this and pay for it, then it bend on the first mannequin test I would have hanged this blacksmith ;) ! It's a noble weapons certainly made by a top blacksmith for is time. For me, it's a weapon made for closing quickly with a great parriying power, then close simili half-swording style. hence the shaft have to be supple (for an extent) and absolutely not bend on impact or when blocking a similar weapon. I think it's possible to make the hole for the hammer before hardening/casting the all shaft ? A bent weapon is completely unbalanced and make the user really unconfortable and unsecure... Just my point anyway, very fun and entertaining vidéos anyway !
Just based on this video this promises to be a very interesting series indeed. Because the weapons are odd, we are basically watching practical science in figuring out how it can be used and what its effects are in... well, not real time, but still following along from the start. Definitely looking forward to the rest. :)
I wonder if it was a poleaxe for a confined space. Imagine fighting up a spiral stairwell with that... the central pivot seems more useful at that point.
I think this is a winner. We know that corridors, doorways, staircases were built specifically at angles and sizes to favor a defender with specialized shortened weapons, such as short hafted maces. This weapon fits perfectly into that archetype. I could easily imagine a single person blocking an entire hallway on their own. The steel shaft also gives it a huge grappling advantage vs swords, which would be a risky tactic on the open field but almost inevitable indoors.
Just my two cents but going off of form following function.... i don't think this pitticular weapon was ever intended for battle use. Matt easily bent the shaft with a blow starting from a dead stop. Which I personally infer that to mean it was designed to limit force transference. I think this was solely meant to be used in a tournament setting so that it caused... enough... damage to produce a winner. But not so much damage it permanently hurt the person being hit.
At the start of battle: Hah! Your puny swords stand no chance against my greplaxordaker! (GREatsword, PoLeAXe, swORDbreAKER combo) At the end of battle: - I surrender! - Sorry, I can't accept that. I need another swing to straighten the greplaxordaker.
Could it possibly be one of those bits of "creative history" where somebody later on created something to fit their picture of the Middle Ages? Also, the bending of the shaft on the swings might be bleeding off a fair amount of the impact, so a spring-tempered shaft could improve the effectiveness.
I'm not sure it would have had to be "later on". Why wouldn't there have been some overly rich and poorly brained Yuppies in the 1400s that wanted cool things hanging on the den wall?
Not to mention the tip of the hammer spike gets wider a lot faster which is going to reduce and stop penetration in comparison to the sword/rapier esk end
Very interesting. To me it seems almost ceremonial or as an impressive looking weapon for a VIP guard where the threat of use is more important than actual use.
I'm 73 y/o and began making oddball weapons since I was a young kid. I love these videos and hope to see many more so I feel obliged to make this suggestion. Matt is smashing a large chunk of metal into a collection of smaller and weaker metal parts. There is a good chance for a small part, or a sliver of metal to bounce back at Matt. He might consider safety glasses. Please keep up the good work.
Seems a bit risky to put the "sword breaker" hook at 90° to the crossguard. If you dont catch the sword, it'll slide down the shaft and hit your fingers.
Perhaps the hook is for wall-hanging, crossed with a sword perhaps? The crossed sword could rest in the hook, while the sword-axe is mounted with the head pointed up? Just a guess. Perhaps the surviving example in the British Museum is one made to be hung on a wall, as a display piece.
Almost like a longsword version of a horseman's hammer. Would really work well as the famous weapon of Robert Baratheon. Ned thinking that he couldn't even lift the warhammer - which is a bit silly when you know how real weapons work - could be creatively interpreted as referring to Robert using a thing like this one-handed on horseback, and then dropping the rains and two-hand it for the big swings.
A tip for measuring stuff from a distance: it might be hard with glass in the way, but if you can get a laser distance measure, you can set it up so you are at a set distance away, and measure the length from your spot to the top, then turn the measure, record the angle, and then take a second measurement from the bottom of the feature. Then you can figure out its length based in some basic trigonometry.
It's one of those weapons that just like a contemporary creation, perhaps for a film or roleplaying game, or cheap TV series. That it's actually an historical weapon is pretty mind-blowing.
I was curious by the really over long grip. Until you mentioned it weighed 7 pounds. So you would swing it like an axe to increase the speed of the head! Blunt force trauma indeed!
Perhaps it may have been designed as some sort of close quarters weapon used by royal/personal guards in defense of something like narrow hallways or spiral stairs in a manor or castle against lightly armored or peasant mob attacks. Or maybe perhaps by a bailiff or guard in a trial or court room. Possibly by a Tyler/Tiler guarding an outer door to a ceremonial meeting or event. It is visually, very intimidating, to common man like myself ! That's how I would use it!! Great video!
I could see a a guard using it more for intimidation in a city setting where it is most likely to encounter soft targets. A court house perhaps? Or a rich nobles house or business?
I think this really highlights the benefit of having one solid shell-like piece of steel, like a breastplate, versus multiple smaller plates when it comes to absorbing impact.
Oh man this is incredible. I've always liked that weapon and wanted to see that in action. Tbh honest I think you really could break a sword with that. If you got a blade trap in that hook and used the cross guards like tire wrench you could get an insane amount of torque with that.
my money is on that little side hook thing being a belt mount - i think tod's problem is that he thinks of it as free hanging and his hangup is that a) the point of balance is off, or b) the end would be flinging around and bumping into things, and matt mentioned it being a secondary weapon, but i don't believe that to be the case. to me it seems like one hand would always be on the pommel as a counterbalance because it is a primary and probably only weapon (it pierces, crushes, and even has a guard for defense). even if marching, hanging it from a belt or something would probably drastically offset the admitted weight of the thing by redistributing it. in addition you could have a hand free to hold reigns when riding horseback.
To me, it seems like the kind of thing a foot soldier might use to unseat an armored man at arms or knight on horseback. The force generated when that thing strikes the breastplate at a gallop must be incredible!
4:29 Do you think it could've been intended to slot into a belt frog of sorts, for carry? It seems like such an odd shape for the feature to be solely for controlling a blade.
I support this idea but just thinking about putting the hammer and prongs near my legs in a sword carry makes my skin crawl. More likely on horseback or for quick work from carriage back.
That bit is certainly far too close to the shaft to be intended as a guard or blade trap. My guess is that it's either a storage hook (not for carrying, but for hanging on a wall at the armory), or it could be a lug to attach something else to the shaft.
I probably would call it "balanced crossguarded pollaxe" or something, since it doesn't have any real blade to call it a sword. But that's kinda long name XD.
I can imagine some reasons why, but how come you don't record the "making" process of these weapons? Apologies if this has been commonly asked and thank you for the content.
A lot of such videos would be Tod scratching his head trying to figure out exactly how to make it, like whether to braze or rivet the head on then deciding to do both. I would have no problem watching that though.
Both Blackadder and Mark make interesting points. Mark I really don't mind showing my exploration because it how we all learn, but the problem with 'Making' videos is that they take a very long time make
@@tods_workshop Yeah, I haven't tried to make anything like such a video but I can imagine the amount of background work what with finding someone to hold a camera and all the inevitable editing. So if you don't mind I'll continue to imagine you spending a lot of head-scratching time. I sure would. ;>)
If the back spike was longer it could more effectively penetrate. The Crenalations would also grab enabling a control effect as well. I'm sure the original would have had a hardened head and spring tempered shaft. It combined control and impact. Not to mention it's meat tenderization qualities. As a retired metalworker my walking cane has a riveting hammer head on a tubular steel shaft.
The issue you're running into with the swings is that the shaft is bending. Instead of all the energy being transferred to the target some is going into the deformation of the shaft. In regards to their obscurity that might just be the reason why. With the level of steel they had it was probably too much of a pain to make it a full steel tempered shaft. They tried the idea, realized it wasn't going to work as they thought and let the idea drop. Would love to see you try and make a fully tempered version and see if the results are of any difference in performance.
It might be possible that they made the tempered shaft set for a couple of patrons who had wealth but people saw them as they tried using them as to much bother and expense for it. These possibly acted as a cautionary tail. +Possible Reason there around today didn't see a lot of use.
Could it have been the weapon of a Churchman? If I remember my religious dogma, Bishops et al went into battle with non cutting weapons. Could it have been a higher status blunt force weapon for a powerful member of the church?
The whole "clergymen couldn't wield bladed weapons" thing is largely a myth. For one thing, blunt weapons absolutely do cause bleeding injuries. And while Catholic canon law did forbid priests from the "shedding of blood" (Canon 18, Fourth Lateran Council), it was probably meant more in the sense of forbidding them to fight at all, rather than a specific prohibition on bladed weapons.
One more possibility for why the thrust penetrated as well/better than the swing is the bending of the shaft. In addition to the plastic deformation, there was presumably some elastic deformation as well, all of that robs energy from the swing. Thrusting, there's probably a lot less energy lost to bending.
There is a lot of force behind the swings, which can be seen by the bent shaft. But, if you want more force, as you're swinging towards the target, allow the front hand to slide to the rear hand. That would allow a lot more of the momentum to be transferred to the spike/hammer-head. That would be similar to using a splitting maul, where you have one hand towards the middle to pick the ax head up but as the maul falls forward your hand moves to the rear. If you did that, changing direction would be impossible, but it would land the most force possible. I'm sure Matt could put a very lovely bend in the shaft that way. Great weapon and it looks like a lot of fun to play with. Not sure how it could ever be made safe enough for sparring.
I imagine the thinking behind this weapon was similar to the High-Explosive Squash-Head of the British tanks. You don't need to penetrate the Armour if you can still make a mess on the other side. Either through blunt trauma in this case or spalling in the tanks case.
All I want for Christmas from you Todl is a video of Mount & Blade (warband, bannerlord, Napoleonic wars, whatever!) Where you play against the other community of the sword members! That's what this channel needs, more Mount and Blade!
Incredibly interesting! I especially enjoy what I learn in the general discussion, such as when Tod was talking about the difficulty of hardening the steel. My biggest question: why didn’t the curator open the case for him!?!?? Did they not know who he was!?!!? Grab the keys, give him some gloves and let the man take some proper measurements!!!!! He’s doing incredible things to further our understanding of history!!!!!
This weapon is used with gauntlets to protect the hands. The quillons give the user see degree of protection, but they have another purpose. The hook is a sword breaker. If an opponents sword, or a polearm, is caught in the hook, the quillons can be used for additions leverage to twist the weapon and keep it locked up or break it. The shaft might bend, but this would be easy to repair. Keep in mind that there would be a difference between striking a 5'6" man and striking a rigid structure.
"Sort of unimpressive... Separated the flesh from the bone, I'll take it back." I've never laughed so much while also being horrified at the implications of a statement.
From the top of fortification, it makes lot of sense. Lots of weight for smashing helmet, cross bar hilt for parry and hook usefull for trapping as you are catching the tip or first foot if the oponent's blade comming from bellow.... and have 2 hands so a lot of leverage... If you only have to protect the upper half of your body it look very efficient...
Sword? Hammer? Swammer? Hamword? Whatever you call it, great video, and it looks like a lot of fun to play with! Although I think we see why this maybe was not a very common weapon
Thats pretty cool. Sorry I gave you a hard time about the tease Tod. You made a good point about the rotation. It shows you know what you are doing. Even a lot of good knife makers don't realize that taking out mass from the rear of an object will make it hit harder. In the USA modern axes now come with super thick handles. By thinning the to older thicknesses you can tell a big difference and that's on a wood cutting axe.
How would that thing work for cavalry? While on horse it would be hold near the pomel. That way you could hit armored infantry with some force. The small spikes would provent it from catching in armor, but at the same time would help breaking through(or denting it inward) it. Once your horse is down you would still be able to use it ...
with cavalry the weight is an issue i think. It be diffcult to hold with one hand for most of the battle so you need both that mean you have to do all your riding without touching your reign. Its possible but you also have to account the swing you have to do when you have both hands
About that hook thing. I think it would help to carry the weapon less like a hammer, and more like a longsword - with two suspension points. I see it as: belt 1, around the waist, with another belt - belt 2, connected with both ends to two points on belt 1 - let's say, next to the buckle, and in the middle of the back. The hook would clip onto belt 2, and somehow the non-business end would be tied to belt 1. For example, with a leather strap and a button stud. It could as well be tied to belt 1 in the middle of the grip, if it makes it wiggle less... Unless the hook is solitarily for attaching it to a saddle.
Just handled one of these, owned by my SCA daughter + son in law. Very well made by an SCA blacksmith, very heavy. Hefting it is very intimidating! Theirs just has a wooden shaft, no guard, with very long steel head attachment straps riveted to the shaft. Sturdy. I was told the name, but forget, will ask them again.
I'm pretty sure I have a better idea of what it is: It's an evolved Horseman's Pick/Horseman's Hammer/Horseman's Axe. It's a cavalry weapon and not meant for infantry use. It's mostly my conjecture but I feel strongly about it. It's longer than the traditional cavalry pick/hammer/axe for better reach, damage, and ability to fence with infantry weapons longer than the horsemans' pick, but not as long and unsuitable for mounted swinging as a full polearm. The cross-guard and hook are uniquely for the mounted soldier's close-in defense if they find themselves unable to get away from the enemy in time. Normally, on the ground, the cross-guard makes it considerably inferior to any other similarly heavy pole weapon, as it prevents you from fluidly choking up on such a heavy weapon (I note this wasn't a huge issue in your part 2 video, but the sparring weapons are by necessity much lighter). However, choking up is not nearly as useful when you're mounted. The hook is just slightly farther out than the cross-guard to give it the better reach you'd need when mounted, but not so far out that it's useless against infantry that have been able to close the distance. Also, if the hook is too close to the cross-guard, because of a height difference of mounted vs infantry, the cross-guard could intercept the enemy sword before the hook could. Finally, unlike most horseman's picks and some axes it doesn't have a long beak/pick for penetrating armor, even though I said it's likely an evolution of them. The absence of the beak is most likely to the complete benefit of the weapon and natural to occur, as penetrating armor, or attempting to, is a fool's errand when such a devastating blunt blow is available. With a beak, if you don't penetrate armor, then you've probably just rolled your weapon, straining your arm and making the energy transfer horribly inefficient. If you have penetrated armor, you've probably then wasted a lot of energy splitting the metal for minimal penetration into flesh, and have gotten your weapon stuck. The only good thing lost with the beak's absence is the ability to dismount other cavalry, which I don't think is a particularly sane thing to want to do if you yourself are mounted. There is the argument that it's a judicial duel weapon, and so they wanted to maximize fencing potential for unarmored defensive capability, while preserving maximum damage with heft. But if you really wanted to maximize fencing potential with a cross-guard, you should make the shaft out of wood and lighten the weapon, because it's too heavy to really capitalize on the cross-guard. Without the weapon being light enough, in an infantry duel the cross-guard is mostly a temporary inconvenience to an enemy that has already compromised you enough to force you to use it. In addition, the extra weight of a metal shaft wouldn't do you any favors in a minimally-armored judicial duel. Returning to the cavalry idea, the metal shaft really only makes sense there, as it maximizes momentum transfer needed to incapacitate an enemy in a single blow. Edit: Also, if my idea is correct, I think a more apt name would be "Horseman's Pole Hammer with Crossguards"
I think that might well be intended for a guards unit. It would look good at parade rest and it's good for blocking portals and passages. It might seem antique by Cromwell's time, but guards often use antiques. It would make short work of anyone wearing light armor under their clothing. It outreaches a court sword or dagger.
From reading the title my mind went to the Egyptian khepesh, then after the unveiling... What monstrosity of hypothetical weapons is that, just to eat my thoughts back from the display at the British museum... Thanks Tod If you could make a khepesh that would be awesome to put it through its paces though...
Wonderfull demonstration thank you! When you are half swording it for the stab you are lining backing up the metal with with entire length of the shaft. There is no bending like when you are doing the baseball bat swings. So you deliver much more force. Also Matt is putting his whole body into that motion. Either way debilitated. Doesn't have to puncture just has to be a disabling blow. Most people are not going to keep going after you smash a few ribs.
I loved the video, but im not sure what im more surprised by the fact of the collaboration or the fact there is so much overlap between the viewer of both channels that the recommended was so apparent. I am one in the group that has watch both channels for quite a while, but would not have guess there where that many. Good old RUclips Algorithm.
I guess, with anything like this from days of old, one must keep in mind it could have been a prototype that never really worked out. I could definitely see the Smith's sitting 'round ye old lunchroom and having the " Yeah, but what if we did this...." conversation. What's in the cabinet may have been just a prototype of a flight of fancy. Any one of us that does metal work has undoubtedly done some mucking around with a crazy idea we just get carried away with. "In days of old, when men were bold, and CAD still not invented. They'd drink their Ale, hammer and wail, forging stuff quite demented"
I was thinking the same, the royal armouries and other military institutions tend to keep all their prototypes and let's face it, this thing is to cool to melt down!
@@ihcfn Yep. I've got a shop full of half finished/abandoned stuff that never saw the public eye. I have a "F**k Around Friday" from time to time. And much of it just stays in the corners cause I haven't been bothered to gather it up and toss it. And the bigger the pile, the more the effort, the less likely it is I'll take up the half plus day it take to cart off. I'm sure Tod's got loads of failed bits kicking around.
Point of the hook and the long hand is taking over your opponents sword. Makes a leverage for the hammer, going in one motion, taking over the sword and hitting the enemy. Swinging more brings this thin in accurate position. Being fluid is the key.
Gotta love the manners of british youtubers: you absolutely don't have to apologize for the teaser it was tasteful and fun and I got one really good joke out of it...
@16:10 This one isn't intuitive, but the reason the pointed head didn't penetrate the armor is because of the surface it was mounted on. A concave surface with the same inertia as a human (as opposed to the inertia of a tiny drawing stand) all of the penetrating force would have gone into the armor, instead of glancing off of it.
Well, that "tiny drawing stand" looks to be made of two-by-fours so it has some inherent inertia despite Matt crashing it with relative ease. Still, you're quite right that when Tod was backing it up there was more damage done to the target. I imagine we'll see some very interesting results from the sparring versions.
I didn't expect that. Thought it was a duelling shield. I am aware of Indian basket-hilted mace and warpick (hilted in the similar way to the Khanda) but an European 2-handed is something new to me.
Speaking of weird weapons, last week I went to the imperial armory in Vienna and saw this pole axe which has a spike that is over half a meter long. It's written there that it belonged to a Hungarian general in the 15-16th century.
i think that the spike on the end is more of an opportunistic-type thing, in that it would generally not be used but if the circumstance arose where there was an exposed area such as an eye, armpit, or back of the knee then it would be used them to incapacitate or hinder as much as possible.
I always have fun when I come around to play Tod, but I had a LOT of fun with this one. Any special requests for things people would like me to explore with this weapon, please comment below.
are these things exceedingly rare in collections?
I don't really think I NEED to ask this, but I'm not the expert. How's it handle compared to a longsword? I mean, I'm guessing the handling is really different, but you were both making comments about the point of balance, so I'm just curious.
What would be the advantage of something like this vs a pollaxe?
This was a fun one, Matt! I'd love to see some exploration of the use of the other end of this weapon. You talked about it early in the video about how you thought both ends were like used in combat. I'm also very intrigued by that prong on the shaft (was it meant to catch swords?); I'd love to see some exploration of that too. Great stuff!
@@SeviNG You thought I was carrying a sword but it was a pollaxe all along! xD
What an odd and fascinating weapon. Almost certainly a judicial combat weapon, a show piece, or maybe an experimental gadget for a rich patron, as shown by the bend in the shaft after real use.
Could it be an attempted to turn a damaged sword into a somewhat useful weapon by upcycling it? It could save time and resources to do that
There's pictures (pictures didn't mean photos, drawings are pictures) of them being used in duelling.
@@Illure that’s a great thought. Definitely a good explanation
@@sarchlalaith8836 I defy you to show me a picture of this being used in a duel.
Would this be a proof of concept for a knight or Lord? No even an "alpha" build just something to show what can be done to armor? Or would this be too expensive for a proof of concept?
Wow, it has all the leverage and bludgeoning ability of a sword with the agility and thrusting ability of a hammer!
nice
As a paramedic I find the sustained injuries truly awful. Clearly immediately debilitating, there are however further likely consequences of such injuries. Obviously infection is a concern, but localised muscle death anddestruction of blood and lymphatic vessels are likely, as is necrosis of the skin. Compartment Syndrome might necessitate amputation of the affected limb, and rhabdomyolysis, the breakdown of damaged muscle could lead to kidney failure and death within a few days of sustaining such an injury. Grim.
@@mikefule330 "Clearly immediately debilitating" - Joe Taylor
Thanks Joe. It is always very useful to get real information from real people, not just me speculating, so thanks
@@mikefule330 or make someone realise that they aren't willing to get hit like that again for the sake of their lord's honour.
And here we all think it's barbaric when the movie characters are walking the field after the battle stabbing the survivors to death. Turns out they're just being merciful.
@@mikefule330 Just looking at the foam, and the inside of that armor, I'm guessing some broken ribs. Even if it's not instantly incapacitating, he's going to be spending the rest of the fight with some broken ribs. Wounding counts too. Especially in a war of Attrition, the wounded can take 3 guys off the battlefield: The guy you just wounded, and the 2 guys to drag him to safety. Of course it's designed to kill, or instantly incapacitate, but it isn't going to do that with every hit. Realistically, the enemy fights less effectively when they're wounded. Any wound counts, even if they're not struck down as if smitten by the hand of God. Even mortal wounds aren't instantly fatal. (There are very few exceptions on the medieval battlefield) It can take a few seconds to bleed out from an arrow through the heart. That doesn't mean he's still fighting, effectively, with an arrow through his heart.
That weapon kinda makes me think of an " apprentice piece " or a practice piece designed to show many aspects of weapons craftsman ship to their master.
I was thinking it looks like an ornamental piece. Your suggestion is a really good shout.
Good thinking
The respect shown by these men is amazing. No talking over, just discussion listening. Brilliant
It's a shame this has become a rare thing these days.
Thanks - but in the outakes where we got all excited, we must have talked over each other, but only because we get all flustered
That's exactly What I was thinking during the whole video, they have a great pace when they talk. Sometimes on YT when a youtuber has a guest or sometimes even on channels that have a double presenter set up, One overwhelms the other, making It a pain to Watch. They worked in perfect balance throught the whole video, which Is a skill on its own.
just nerds being nerds trying to learn stuff
@@metatronyt I think Skall is pretty good at that too, in his hangouts and other dialogue videos. I think it's also like in online meetings, in that it gets worse if the meeting is online than in person, so Matt and Tod has a bit of an advantage over digital discussions there.
Tod:" Darling! Matt is here to join dinner."
Tod's wife:"Would you mind to help to tenderise the meat?"
Matt:" My pleasure."
And I am indeed having that lamb tonight
@@tods_workshop I have a crazy idea. This is squire's practice weapon while tenderising meat for lord's cook. Two birds, one stone.
@@tods_workshop Your dinner was the meat that Matt beat and penetrated up to the shaft? o.o
@@nevisysbryd7450 Just because someone else has tenderised your meat before you is no reason to turn up your nose. Besides, good luck finding some that isn't pre-penetrated these days. Wait, what are we talking about again?
One of my neighbours owns something very similar to this, apparently passed down through the family from the English Civil Wars. I will ask him tomorrow if I could take some photos for comparison.
That will be fascinating to see. If you do get photos, where will you post them?
Try and get the point of balance for it if you can as well
Interesting, i wanna see it as well.
Anything come of this?
@@ShinM. His neighbour when he saw him coming towards the house with a camera beheaded old Handgrenade.
I just want to leave this thought that applies to all weapons with these kind of hammer heads: I think we're a bit confused by the spike. I think we see it alongside the hammer, and assume it's for *penetrating through* lighter armour. I don't think this is exactly right. I think both the spike and hammer are for transferring blunt force, just in different ways for different targets. The "spread out" head of the hammer is to allow the force to be conveyed to very hard, rigid targets (plate) without it just skidding off. Malleable armours like mail and textile armours aren't going to redirect force like plate, so you don't need to spread the force out, so that's why you have the spike. It allows all of that blunt force to be applied to a tiny area, which is going to do more damage through the armour (not necessarily through penetrating)
Though I should say that I'm not referring to the very long, slender, "pick" like spikes that you see. Those definitely look like they're intended to penetrate softer targets. I'm referring to the "stubbier" kind of spikes lol
A war hammers back spike was used to punch holes right through plate armor. All hammers were just brutal weapons. Great hammers heavy mauls etc were often used to cave in the chest plate on plate armor to compress the chest resulting in suffocation. Hammer with long spikes had their spiked used to punch through plate specifically the chest to pernitrate the chest cavity or a helm. Short blunt spiked would be used to cave in a helmet by focusing the force on a small area. This is why you often see hammers with this head design the small spikes on the striking face would dent the armor or Pearce it and the flat of the hammer would continue to crush the damaged helm. With one solid hit those spikes could then enter the skull
@@nanaki-seto What are you basing this on? From what I've seen, the likelihood of a even a spike on a polearm penetrating plate is extremely low. Even given a perfect hit (which is not likely due to it hitting a likely angled, very "slippery" surface), I would not put money on it penetrating. I think it's one of those commonly repeated misconceptions that it can/was intended to do so. We know these weapons "worked" or they wouldn't have been used for so long and so frequently, but we might be making flawed assumptions in how exactly how they worked.
Bit of a tangent, but I think there are many things like this actually. Like with bows: it seems pretty clear that even a powerful bow isn't going to penetrate competently made plate; but we know that bows worked, even against well armoured knights and men-at-arms. So how did they work? We don't really know, but it's probably more complicated, nuanced, and frankly, less meme-worthy than "arrow penetrate breastplate".
I think the hammers were used to:
1. Transfer force through the armor and cause injuries like broken bones and if striking the helm, concussion and/or unconsciousness.
2. Compromise the articulation points to restrict movement and make the individual less combat effective.
@@tasatort9778 My main point about the hammerhead is that it's primary job is just getting purchase on the "slippery" plate target, so it can efficiently transfer the force. That's why most hammerheads on weapons have a kind of "splayed out" head. If a spike was able to get the same kind of purchase on plate, there'd be no reason to have the hammerhead
@@tommeakin1732 That's my guess as well and remember, you don't have to kill or seriously injur someone to get them out of the fight. If you simply daze them a bit, or take away their ability to defend themselves effectively they'll most likely back off to preserve their lives. Once you do this to enough enemy soldiers their line starts to break and victory often happens soon after. A breast plate is a pretty solid defense against almost everything, until you focus on the edges of it. Nobody ever does these armour tests properly. The same weak spots you would look to penetrate while half swording, can in many cases also be "crushed" quite easily because the armour is weaker and less substantial in those areas. You don't hammer the enemies chest. You hammer his neck and joints. Even if you don't break bones or cause enough physical trauma, his armour is going to bend and immobilize him. Then he becomes afraid and backs out of the fight. Fear of death on the battle field is just as important as actually killing someone.
I love these epispdes so much.
These are the kind of collaborations that I adore. The combination of designing and forging a weapon, historical context, actually testing it, and discussing doctrine. This is the sort of thing that sets my imagination ablaze.
With the shaft bending at every strike it's probably safe to say that this weapon is unable to transfer as much energy as a traditional polearm in a strong swing. Which is also a factor of why the stab was apparently more effective than the swing.
But wouldn't the wood of a polearm bend and flex? How much energy is lost in each case?
Very true
I am wondering if this was indeed a secondary weapon, smash the shield arm with blunt force trauma to drop the guard and then use dagger and/or sword to finish off.
@@Buzzcook The hickory staves I've trained & messed around with are remarkably rigid. I'm sure they flex some on powerful strikes, but I don't recall noticing it. I can't bend the 4.5ft one I have at hand at all by bracing with my knee or against the ground. Now, I'm not a large or muscular person & hickory is stronger than ash or oak, but I suspect the thicker pollaxe shafts stood up well to heavy blows. I once bent an Arms & Armor English bill by accidentally striking a pumpkin with the flat of the top spike. I don't recall the ash shaft flexing enough to notice when hitting pumpkins. With hickory staves, I struck pumpkins as hard as with the bill & don't remember any flex.
@@b.h.abbott-motley2427 Hickory has a bending strength of 20200. So yes it resists bending very well. But still it does bend.
I think it looks more like a common war hammer with enlarge guard because there is really no "blade" in the middle.
Looks like an estoc with a hammer head added. Swords don't need an edge to be a sword.
@thekaxmax Nah this thing is no sword, is a hammer with a guard. And in my opinion bladeless swords, like some polish thrusting swords that were triangular or hexagonal pieces of metal with a point, aren't really swords, as much as people call them it. Names work like that. What's the difference between a short sword and a long knife? It can be no other but the names. It's how it is. Now I agree with you that a sword needs no edge to be a sword, but it needs at least a blade. And yeah, the thing in this video is no sword.
@@thekaxmax Nah this thing is no sword, is a hammer with a guard. And in my opinion bladeless swords, like some polish thrusting swords that were triangular or hexagonal pieces of metal with a point, aren't really swords, as much as people call them it. Names work like that. What's the difference between a short sword and a long knife? It can be no other but the names. It's how it is. Now I agree with you that a sword needs no edge to be a sword, but it needs at least a blade. And yeah, the thing in this video is no sword.
i agree that this weapon is mainly an hammer, but it isn't just a war hammer with a guard: it also has a very low point of balance, just like a sword. In my opinion 'sword-hammer' or 'sword-pollaxe' are suitable name
15:15 I actually think that the reason for the deeper penetration with the top-spike is simply that it is much narrower than the big, beefy and thick hammer-spike.
In return it delivers a hell lot more of pure concussive force.
A swing will always be more powerful than a thrust...at least that's what I have experienced.
There is also that - thanks but when we just chat without scripts we do miss the obvious sometimes!
@@tods_workshop Yeah, that's very much understandable.
In the situation one often overlooks aspects which seem very obvious when looking at it later.
Keep up the good content, Tod!
The point and the hook working together would hold it securely in a harness that is not hung in place but secured at both ends.
Now that is a good idea
Saw Tod as the expert on a scrapheap challenge episode yesterday. Recognised him immediately. He made a golf ball machine gun. I know him from RUclips making and exploring old weapons similar to this. But seems like he is a man of many talents and won his team the competition on scrapheap. Love the content Tod new and old! Some real high class stuff!
Blimey that must have been 20 years ago with a much younger me. That was a fun one and in fact I ended up being a staff engineer on the show for two series. Great fun and an amazing experience.
Man I miss that show. It was great stuff.
@@sbvera13 Yeah, one of those fun shows where people get to be creative in solving problems as well as show off their crafting skills.
I couldn't find the golf ball machine gun episode on RUclips but did find the ballista episode where Tod and teammates built a bizarre hydraulic ballista
ruclips.net/video/o54pVz7TjtI/видео.html
also there is Tod's "could have been" reminesce about the episode
ruclips.net/video/QkVslMWwx8ch/видео.htmlttps://ruclips.net/video/o54pVz7TjtI/видео.html
Wow I love these collaboration videos. You both did a great Job. I was also very surpriced with the shaft bending After the impact. I think that gives us a Hint. If It Bends on a duel it's no big deal, but if It Bends on a Battlefield It would be. Matt mentioned the Weapon Is shown in manuscripts, I wonder if it's ever shown used in battle. If It isn't, then perhaps it's Just a "use and ditch" Weapon for duels. A bit like the Shields that would get destroyed. On a Battlefield a poleaxe would definitely outperform this, also because of the range advantage. Sure, the sword hilt gives Better defence but then again, range Is a form of defence in of itself. Could It Just be a curiosity implement like the lantern shield?
HI Meta,
Thanks for popping by and the compliments. You make some good points and to be honest I suspect that Matts thoughts that it is a judicial duel weapon, could be right.
The multiweapon fancy lantern shield found in museums, presumably? Judging from Sir Kenelm Digby's description of encountering them in a streetfight in Madrid in 1623, bucklers specially constructed for night fighting to hold lanterns and reflect their light forwards were seemingly in real use, and not curiosities.
"his enemies having at the top of their bucklers artificial lanterns whose light was cast only forwards by their being made with an iron plate on that side towards the holders, so that their bodies remained in darkness"
really nice collaboration, as usual. But for me it's impossible that the shaft is only mild steel. If I was a knight that have ordered this and pay for it, then it bend on the first mannequin test I would have hanged this blacksmith ;) ! It's a noble weapons certainly made by a top blacksmith for is time. For me, it's a weapon made for closing quickly with a great parriying power, then close simili half-swording style. hence the shaft have to be supple (for an extent) and absolutely not bend on impact or when blocking a similar weapon. I think it's possible to make the hole for the hammer before hardening/casting the all shaft ?
A bent weapon is completely unbalanced and make the user really unconfortable and unsecure... Just my point anyway, very fun and entertaining vidéos anyway !
Just based on this video this promises to be a very interesting series indeed.
Because the weapons are odd, we are basically watching practical science in figuring out how it can be used and what its effects are in... well, not real time, but still following along from the start.
Definitely looking forward to the rest. :)
Thanks and we are enjoying it too
This is one of my favorite crossover series, keep up the brilliant work you two!
As a name for this type of weapon I propose: Longhammer! Half longsword, half hammer, all Skyrim reference.
I love the energy of you two together, geeking out, discussing, so good!
Thanks
When Tod said the word 'sword-axe' I fainted. It has to be one of the best words ever.
Did you mean 'feinted' 😉
@@lightwoven5326 who else didn't see that joke coming a mile away 🤣
I wonder if it was a poleaxe for a confined space. Imagine fighting up a spiral stairwell with that... the central pivot seems more useful at that point.
I think this is a winner.
We know that corridors, doorways, staircases were built specifically at angles and sizes to favor a defender with specialized shortened weapons, such as short hafted maces. This weapon fits perfectly into that archetype. I could easily imagine a single person blocking an entire hallway on their own. The steel shaft also gives it a huge grappling advantage vs swords, which would be a risky tactic on the open field but almost inevitable indoors.
Just my two cents but going off of form following function.... i don't think this pitticular weapon was ever intended for battle use. Matt easily bent the shaft with a blow starting from a dead stop. Which I personally infer that to mean it was designed to limit force transference. I think this was solely meant to be used in a tournament setting so that it caused... enough... damage to produce a winner. But not so much damage it permanently hurt the person being hit.
At the start of battle: Hah! Your puny swords stand no chance against my greplaxordaker! (GREatsword, PoLeAXe, swORDbreAKER combo)
At the end of battle:
- I surrender!
- Sorry, I can't accept that. I need another swing to straighten the greplaxordaker.
That's actually easier to read than it looks.
I totally vote for calling it greplaxordaker from now on. 👍
@@isakjohansson112 Thanks for the support! What I can't figure out, is how that's not a word, already, the way it flows of the tongue!
Could it possibly be one of those bits of "creative history" where somebody later on created something to fit their picture of the Middle Ages?
Also, the bending of the shaft on the swings might be bleeding off a fair amount of the impact, so a spring-tempered shaft could improve the effectiveness.
I'm not sure it would have had to be "later on". Why wouldn't there have been some overly rich and poorly brained Yuppies in the 1400s that wanted cool things hanging on the den wall?
Not to mention the tip of the hammer spike gets wider a lot faster which is going to reduce and stop penetration in comparison to the sword/rapier esk end
You mean like the iron maiden, sounds plausible.
"Hilted pole-hammer"
"Hilted pole-axe"
"Bluntsword"
Those are what I would call it of I was in charge... But as it were...
I love bluntsword.
I would add something like "cross-axe" or "cross-hammer"
What about the greplaxordaker?
Very interesting. To me it seems almost ceremonial or as an impressive looking weapon for a VIP guard where the threat of use is more important than actual use.
I also wondered if it was a parade weapon or similar, but Matts thinks it was an English judicial duelling weapon
@@tods_workshop I think so to, and maybe the dingus is to hang a banner or flag
This is obviously the legendary Zweihammer
Or as I like to call it: the MONTANTRUM
I'm 73 y/o and began making oddball weapons since I was a young kid. I love these videos and hope to see many more so I feel obliged to make this suggestion. Matt is smashing a large chunk of metal into a collection of smaller and weaker metal parts. There is a good chance for a small part, or a sliver of metal to bounce back at Matt. He might consider safety glasses. Please keep up the good work.
Seems a bit risky to put the "sword breaker" hook at 90° to the crossguard. If you dont catch the sword, it'll slide down the shaft and hit your fingers.
just my pet theory, but as someone said in the comments, if that is what it is for then why not both sides?
Perhaps the hook is for wall-hanging, crossed with a sword perhaps? The crossed sword could rest in the hook, while the sword-axe is mounted with the head pointed up?
Just a guess. Perhaps the surviving example in the British Museum is one made to be hung on a wall, as a display piece.
@@tods_workshop well on Messers or other longswords the nagel is sometimes/often only on one side as well.
My thought is that its just to make carrying that beast easier. Reminds me of belt hooks on smaller hammers and axes
@@tods_workshop
Really love your work.
I wonder if its for hanging on display. Which way do the Cromwellian markings face?
Loved seeing the chickens make an appearance. As an owner of Buff Orpingtons, it was fun to see your hens!
Two of my favorite RUclipsrs! Love the collab, keep up the great work, both of you!
Almost like a longsword version of a horseman's hammer. Would really work well as the famous weapon of Robert Baratheon. Ned thinking that he couldn't even lift the warhammer - which is a bit silly when you know how real weapons work - could be creatively interpreted as referring to Robert using a thing like this one-handed on horseback, and then dropping the rains and two-hand it for the big swings.
I was hoping this would be next! Remember seeing this in the British Museum, next to Oliver Cromwells wax death mask!
A tip for measuring stuff from a distance: it might be hard with glass in the way, but if you can get a laser distance measure, you can set it up so you are at a set distance away, and measure the length from your spot to the top, then turn the measure, record the angle, and then take a second measurement from the bottom of the feature. Then you can figure out its length based in some basic trigonometry.
Amazing, just amazing. Great work mates. I think Eastern Romans had simmiliar idea with spathovaklion/sword-mace. Anyway again amazing job.
It's one of those weapons that just like a contemporary creation, perhaps for a film or roleplaying game, or cheap TV series.
That it's actually an historical weapon is pretty mind-blowing.
I was curious by the really over long grip. Until you mentioned it weighed 7 pounds. So you would swing it like an axe to increase the speed of the head! Blunt force trauma indeed!
Perhaps it may have been designed as some sort of close quarters weapon used by royal/personal guards in defense of something like narrow hallways or spiral stairs in a manor or castle against lightly armored or peasant mob attacks.
Or maybe perhaps by a bailiff or guard in a trial or court room.
Possibly by a Tyler/Tiler guarding an outer door to a ceremonial meeting or event.
It is visually, very intimidating, to common man like myself !
That's how I would use it!!
Great video!
I could see a a guard using it more for intimidation in a city setting where it is most likely to encounter soft targets. A court house perhaps? Or a rich nobles house or business?
I think this really highlights the benefit of having one solid shell-like piece of steel, like a breastplate, versus multiple smaller plates when it comes to absorbing impact.
Oh man this is incredible. I've always liked that weapon and wanted to see that in action. Tbh honest I think you really could break a sword with that. If you got a blade trap in that hook and used the cross guards like tire wrench you could get an insane amount of torque with that.
my money is on that little side hook thing being a belt mount - i think tod's problem is that he thinks of it as free hanging and his hangup is that a) the point of balance is off, or b) the end would be flinging around and bumping into things, and matt mentioned it being a secondary weapon, but i don't believe that to be the case. to me it seems like one hand would always be on the pommel as a counterbalance because it is a primary and probably only weapon (it pierces, crushes, and even has a guard for defense). even if marching, hanging it from a belt or something would probably drastically offset the admitted weight of the thing by redistributing it. in addition you could have a hand free to hold reigns when riding horseback.
Can't wait for Swordhammer 40 million to come out,GW needs more competition.
Amazing stuff... well-done guys! And Tod, amazing craftsmanship. Want to ask... what blunt sword is that?
Albion Lichtenauer
@@tods_workshop thanks, Tod!
To me, it seems like the kind of thing a foot soldier might use to unseat an armored man at arms or knight on horseback.
The force generated when that thing strikes the breastplate at a gallop must be incredible!
4:29 Do you think it could've been intended to slot into a belt frog of sorts, for carry? It seems like such an odd shape for the feature to be solely for controlling a blade.
The whole machine seems a bit large to me for walking carry. Perhaps it was a mounted weapon, and that hung on some of the horse's trappings?
I support this idea but just thinking about putting the hammer and prongs near my legs in a sword carry makes my skin crawl.
More likely on horseback or for quick work from carriage back.
That doesn't address the balance issue, unless it's also strapped down somewhere around the hilt too.
That bit is certainly far too close to the shaft to be intended as a guard or blade trap. My guess is that it's either a storage hook (not for carrying, but for hanging on a wall at the armory), or it could be a lug to attach something else to the shaft.
@@earthknight60 that is something that would be a part that is no longer around. I would expect something for the hilt some sort of strapping.
Loved the video Tod! Thanks for putting in extra effort to make the sparring versions of the weapons happen!
not yet, but I will - thanks
I probably would call it "balanced crossguarded pollaxe" or something, since it doesn't have any real blade to call it a sword.
But that's kinda long name XD.
Crossguarded pollaxe is pretty good
Nope, im sticking with the greplaxordaker.
i think that the thing i love the most about those video is that, in the end, its just a bunch of huge nerd playing with their toys in the backyard
I can imagine some reasons why, but how come you don't record the "making" process of these weapons? Apologies if this has been commonly asked and thank you for the content.
A lot of such videos would be Tod scratching his head trying to figure out exactly how to make it, like whether to braze or rivet the head on then deciding to do both.
I would have no problem watching that though.
Both Blackadder and Mark make interesting points. Mark I really don't mind showing my exploration because it how we all learn, but the problem with 'Making' videos is that they take a very long time make
@@tods_workshop Yeah, I haven't tried to make anything like such a video but I can imagine the amount of background work what with finding someone to hold a camera and all the inevitable editing. So if you don't mind I'll continue to imagine you spending a lot of head-scratching time. I sure would. ;>)
If the back spike was longer it could more effectively penetrate. The Crenalations would also grab enabling a control effect as well. I'm sure the original would have had a hardened head and spring tempered shaft. It combined control and impact. Not to mention it's meat tenderization qualities. As a retired metalworker my walking cane has a riveting hammer head on a tubular steel shaft.
The issue you're running into with the swings is that the shaft is bending. Instead of all the energy being transferred to the target some is going into the deformation of the shaft.
In regards to their obscurity that might just be the reason why. With the level of steel they had it was probably too much of a pain to make it a full steel tempered shaft. They tried the idea, realized it wasn't going to work as they thought and let the idea drop.
Would love to see you try and make a fully tempered version and see if the results are of any difference in performance.
It might be possible that they made the tempered shaft set for a couple of patrons who had wealth but people saw them as they tried using them as to much bother and expense for it. These possibly acted as a cautionary tail. +Possible Reason there around today didn't see a lot of use.
Loved the video. Especially loved the cameo walk through by the chooks around the 9:00 minute mark.
If it is a 'sword breaker' why not have one on each side?
That is a very good point - damn you!
I thought so too!
that anvil intro is so kino. Whoever made that deserves credit lol
This weapon is actually called Günther, though its real name is Mannfred. Don't ask. ;)
The casual chickens in the background, absolutely love it. One of the best channels on YT.
Much appreciated
Could it have been the weapon of a Churchman? If I remember my religious dogma, Bishops et al went into battle with non cutting weapons. Could it have been a higher status blunt force weapon for a powerful member of the church?
Unfortunately false, that is basically DnD
The whole "clergymen couldn't wield bladed weapons" thing is largely a myth. For one thing, blunt weapons absolutely do cause bleeding injuries. And while Catholic canon law did forbid priests from the "shedding of blood" (Canon 18, Fourth Lateran Council), it was probably meant more in the sense of forbidding them to fight at all, rather than a specific prohibition on bladed weapons.
One more possibility for why the thrust penetrated as well/better than the swing is the bending of the shaft. In addition to the plastic deformation, there was presumably some elastic deformation as well, all of that robs energy from the swing. Thrusting, there's probably a lot less energy lost to bending.
00:09:00 nuggies!!!!
There is a lot of force behind the swings, which can be seen by the bent shaft. But, if you want more force, as you're swinging towards the target, allow the front hand to slide to the rear hand. That would allow a lot more of the momentum to be transferred to the spike/hammer-head. That would be similar to using a splitting maul, where you have one hand towards the middle to pick the ax head up but as the maul falls forward your hand moves to the rear. If you did that, changing direction would be impossible, but it would land the most force possible. I'm sure Matt could put a very lovely bend in the shaft that way.
Great weapon and it looks like a lot of fun to play with. Not sure how it could ever be made safe enough for sparring.
Crossguard on a poleaxe seems like a fine idea, can't wait to see if they'll actually help or just get in the wya
loving this series both educational and very entertaining.
SO pleased to see this after watching the Scholargladitoria video on these two weapons.
I derive existential satisfaction from the chicken wandering through the shot at about 9:02
I like them wandering around too - except for the pooing at the back of the house
Very interesting take on this obscure topic, thanks a lot!
I imagine the thinking behind this weapon was similar to the High-Explosive Squash-Head of the British tanks. You don't need to penetrate the Armour if you can still make a mess on the other side. Either through blunt trauma in this case or spalling in the tanks case.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.
All I want for Christmas from you Todl is a video of Mount & Blade (warband, bannerlord, Napoleonic wars, whatever!) Where you play against the other community of the sword members! That's what this channel needs, more Mount and Blade!
Incredibly interesting! I especially enjoy what I learn in the general discussion, such as when Tod was talking about the difficulty of hardening the steel. My biggest question: why didn’t the curator open the case for him!?!?? Did they not know who he was!?!!? Grab the keys, give him some gloves and let the man take some proper measurements!!!!! He’s doing incredible things to further our understanding of history!!!!!
I love that Tod pulled a dirty Matt Easton joke at 17:40. I love watching u guys.
This weapon is used with gauntlets to protect the hands. The quillons give the user see degree of protection, but they have another purpose.
The hook is a sword breaker. If an opponents sword, or a polearm, is caught in the hook, the quillons can be used for additions leverage to twist the weapon and keep it locked up or break it.
The shaft might bend, but this would be easy to repair. Keep in mind that there would be a difference between striking a 5'6" man and striking a rigid structure.
"Sort of unimpressive... Separated the flesh from the bone, I'll take it back."
I've never laughed so much while also being horrified at the implications of a statement.
From the top of fortification, it makes lot of sense. Lots of weight for smashing helmet, cross bar hilt for parry and hook usefull for trapping as you are catching the tip or first foot if the oponent's blade comming from bellow.... and have 2 hands so a lot of leverage... If you only have to protect the upper half of your body it look very efficient...
I quite enjoyed the chicken ambling through the frame at 9:06
Sword? Hammer? Swammer? Hamword?
Whatever you call it, great video, and it looks like a lot of fun to play with! Although I think we see why this maybe was not a very common weapon
Thats pretty cool. Sorry I gave you a hard time about the tease Tod.
You made a good point about the rotation. It shows you know what you are doing. Even a lot of good knife makers don't realize that taking out mass from the rear of an object will make it hit harder. In the USA modern axes now come with super thick handles. By thinning the to older thicknesses you can tell a big difference and that's on a wood cutting axe.
I love that you have chickens! They just roaming around eating bugs. While Matt has fun with your metal toys!
How would that thing work for cavalry?
While on horse it would be hold near the pomel. That way you could hit armored infantry with some force. The small spikes would provent it from catching in armor, but at the same time would help breaking through(or denting it inward) it.
Once your horse is down you would still be able to use it ...
with cavalry the weight is an issue i think. It be diffcult to hold with one hand for most of the battle so you need both that mean you have to do all your riding without touching your reign. Its possible but you also have to account the swing you have to do when you have both hands
@@Marveryn I was thinking doing it like polo/one handed. And only durring a charging attack. The weight is def. an issue.
Wasnt expecting that but lovely to see. Lots of work mustve went into that weapon
About that hook thing. I think it would help to carry the weapon less like a hammer, and more like a longsword - with two suspension points. I see it as: belt 1, around the waist, with another belt - belt 2, connected with both ends to two points on belt 1 - let's say, next to the buckle, and in the middle of the back. The hook would clip onto belt 2, and somehow the non-business end would be tied to belt 1. For example, with a leather strap and a button stud. It could as well be tied to belt 1 in the middle of the grip, if it makes it wiggle less... Unless the hook is solitarily for attaching it to a saddle.
Just handled one of these, owned by my SCA daughter + son in law. Very well made by an SCA blacksmith, very heavy. Hefting it is very intimidating! Theirs just has a wooden shaft, no guard, with very long steel head attachment straps riveted to the shaft. Sturdy. I was told the name, but forget, will ask them again.
I'm pretty sure I have a better idea of what it is: It's an evolved Horseman's Pick/Horseman's Hammer/Horseman's Axe. It's a cavalry weapon and not meant for infantry use. It's mostly my conjecture but I feel strongly about it.
It's longer than the traditional cavalry pick/hammer/axe for better reach, damage, and ability to fence with infantry weapons longer than the horsemans' pick, but not as long and unsuitable for mounted swinging as a full polearm. The cross-guard and hook are uniquely for the mounted soldier's close-in defense if they find themselves unable to get away from the enemy in time. Normally, on the ground, the cross-guard makes it considerably inferior to any other similarly heavy pole weapon, as it prevents you from fluidly choking up on such a heavy weapon (I note this wasn't a huge issue in your part 2 video, but the sparring weapons are by necessity much lighter). However, choking up is not nearly as useful when you're mounted. The hook is just slightly farther out than the cross-guard to give it the better reach you'd need when mounted, but not so far out that it's useless against infantry that have been able to close the distance. Also, if the hook is too close to the cross-guard, because of a height difference of mounted vs infantry, the cross-guard could intercept the enemy sword before the hook could.
Finally, unlike most horseman's picks and some axes it doesn't have a long beak/pick for penetrating armor, even though I said it's likely an evolution of them. The absence of the beak is most likely to the complete benefit of the weapon and natural to occur, as penetrating armor, or attempting to, is a fool's errand when such a devastating blunt blow is available. With a beak, if you don't penetrate armor, then you've probably just rolled your weapon, straining your arm and making the energy transfer horribly inefficient. If you have penetrated armor, you've probably then wasted a lot of energy splitting the metal for minimal penetration into flesh, and have gotten your weapon stuck. The only good thing lost with the beak's absence is the ability to dismount other cavalry, which I don't think is a particularly sane thing to want to do if you yourself are mounted.
There is the argument that it's a judicial duel weapon, and so they wanted to maximize fencing potential for unarmored defensive capability, while preserving maximum damage with heft. But if you really wanted to maximize fencing potential with a cross-guard, you should make the shaft out of wood and lighten the weapon, because it's too heavy to really capitalize on the cross-guard. Without the weapon being light enough, in an infantry duel the cross-guard is mostly a temporary inconvenience to an enemy that has already compromised you enough to force you to use it. In addition, the extra weight of a metal shaft wouldn't do you any favors in a minimally-armored judicial duel. Returning to the cavalry idea, the metal shaft really only makes sense there, as it maximizes momentum transfer needed to incapacitate an enemy in a single blow.
Edit: Also, if my idea is correct, I think a more apt name would be "Horseman's Pole Hammer with Crossguards"
I think that might well be intended for a guards unit. It would look good at parade rest and it's good for blocking portals and passages.
It might seem antique by Cromwell's time, but guards often use antiques.
It would make short work of anyone wearing light armor under their clothing. It outreaches a court sword or dagger.
That is such an ODD weapon but I really dig the design and can see the utility in it.
From reading the title my mind went to the Egyptian khepesh, then after the unveiling... What monstrosity of hypothetical weapons is that, just to eat my thoughts back from the display at the British museum... Thanks Tod
If you could make a khepesh that would be awesome to put it through its paces though...
Wonderfull demonstration thank you!
When you are half swording it for the stab you are lining backing up the metal with with entire length of the shaft. There is no bending like when you are doing the baseball bat swings. So you deliver much more force. Also Matt is putting his whole body into that motion.
Either way debilitated. Doesn't have to puncture just has to be a disabling blow. Most people are not going to keep going after you smash a few ribs.
Very interesting! Looking forward to the sparring
I loved the video, but im not sure what im more surprised by the fact of the collaboration or the fact there is so much overlap between the viewer of both channels that the recommended was so apparent. I am one in the group that has watch both channels for quite a while, but would not have guess there where that many. Good old RUclips Algorithm.
I guess, with anything like this from days of old, one must keep in mind it could have been a prototype that never really worked out. I could definitely see the Smith's sitting 'round ye old lunchroom and having the " Yeah, but what if we did this...." conversation. What's in the cabinet may have been just a prototype of a flight of fancy. Any one of us that does metal work has undoubtedly done some mucking around with a crazy idea we just get carried away with.
"In days of old, when men were bold, and CAD still not invented. They'd drink their Ale, hammer and wail, forging stuff quite demented"
I was thinking the same, the royal armouries and other military institutions tend to keep all their prototypes and let's face it, this thing is to cool to melt down!
@@ihcfn Yep. I've got a shop full of half finished/abandoned stuff that never saw the public eye. I have a "F**k Around Friday" from time to time. And much of it just stays in the corners cause I haven't been bothered to gather it up and toss it. And the bigger the pile, the more the effort, the less likely it is I'll take up the half plus day it take to cart off. I'm sure Tod's got loads of failed bits kicking around.
Point of the hook and the long hand is taking over your opponents sword. Makes a leverage for the hammer, going in one motion, taking over the sword and hitting the enemy. Swinging more brings this thin in accurate position. Being fluid is the key.
Thinking about this because of the balance of this "thing"
Gotta love the manners of british youtubers: you absolutely don't have to apologize for the teaser it was tasteful and fun and I got one really good joke out of it...
I can't have been the only one that had an evil thought when that chicken came into frame 🤣
This was great, thanks guys.
@16:10 This one isn't intuitive, but the reason the pointed head didn't penetrate the armor is because of the surface it was mounted on.
A concave surface with the same inertia as a human (as opposed to the inertia of a tiny drawing stand) all of the penetrating force would have gone into the armor, instead of glancing off of it.
Well, that "tiny drawing stand" looks to be made of two-by-fours so it has some inherent inertia despite Matt crashing it with relative ease. Still, you're quite right that when Tod was backing it up there was more damage done to the target.
I imagine we'll see some very interesting results from the sparring versions.
I didn't expect that. Thought it was a duelling shield. I am aware of Indian basket-hilted mace and warpick (hilted in the similar way to the Khanda) but an European 2-handed is something new to me.
I like this theme of unusual weapons. Well done guys!
Thanks - we are enjoying it too
I look forward to the upcoming tests!! I really enjoy these collaborations between you two.
Speaking of weird weapons, last week I went to the imperial armory in Vienna and saw this pole axe which has a spike that is over half a meter long. It's written there that it belonged to a Hungarian general in the 15-16th century.
That is literally, very METAL! As in, THIS is the badass weapon that should be on the covers of heavy metal albums!
i think that the spike on the end is more of an opportunistic-type thing, in that it would generally not be used but if the circumstance arose where there was an exposed area such as an eye, armpit, or back of the knee then it would be used them to incapacitate or hinder as much as possible.